"Derek Mathieson FACI" <
derek.mathieson@dial.pipex.com> wrote:
"Dave Watterson" <
forums@theiac.org.uk> wrote:
Once again comes the notion that "adult" language is not necessary and
should
not be used in "Amateur" films. This time it was raised by a judge's comment
at the North Thames Triangle competition final.
To me this is a variation on the idea that amateur movies should always
be
"light entertainment". That they should not be upsetting. And I don't buy
it.
Of course there is a place for family-friendly movies, but there is also
a place for more challenging, difficult and darker work. Like it or not
swearing
is part of everyday life for a huge part of the population.
What do you think? (Without explicit examples, please!)
Dave
We cannot as an institute be seen to be censoring movies entered in our
competition...you
only have to watch tv any night of the week and you'll get plenty of bad
language...If it is so bad, we can issue a warning before screening...
Derek Mathieson FACI
7899
Dave and Derek
I do endorse both your statements. Any sort of censorship is bad. We now
live in a society where swearing in the street, if overheard by a member
of the government's state sponsored law enforcement units can result in arrest,
fines and imprisonment.
Swearing and ("language" as you call it) should be discouraged simply on
the basis that it is boring, and overuse by individuals just shows how ignorant,
badly educated, and lacking in a proper vocabulary they are!
Television and commercial films contain a lot of four letter words, and this
is justified by claiming that they reflect the realism of everyday life.
This is probably correct, but would it not be more interesting to make films
about people who have had a broader and more interesting life, and although
capable of an occasional resort to using a word like “fuck,” would have a
richer language base. All such words are only words, and Dave, maybe you
are oversensitive about their use, on this MB. I heard, only this week, a
relatively young (about 40 ish) member of the Waugh family (in front of his
three year old son) using that word several times in a TV documentary about
his life, and the Waugh’s history – and it did not seem out of place. If
four letter words are going to be used, then I would plead that they were
used with good pronunciation, making certain that all the vowels and consonants
are clearly articulated, and some emphasis is given to such words, meaning
that their full colour and richness comes out. No apologetic mutterings.
This will of course mean that about 95% of our (UK) actors will need to be
retrained, not to mention the 100% of American actors, who generally have
even worse diction. (And who also need to learn proper English as well!).
(Sorry, Ned! – it has to be said – I’m not being anti-American, and having
read a lot of your posts on here, I’m sure you will take this in the spirit
that it is intended).
Going on, I dare say I might have upset one or two people by this posting,
and therefore I apologise in advance. (I’m referring mostly to the f word
used here). My excuse is that we need to educate our children to learn and
understand the context of every word in the English language (not ignoring
the Scots and Welsh language – and others) so that they may have a deeper
understanding of the richness and variety of this means of communication.
If we then need to teach our children such words, even pre-nursery, we may
then find that they have little or no need for them in later life, having
learnt them. Then they may have outgrown their limitations.
P.S. There is a company in the UK selling clothes, I think, called Fcuk Ltd.
(It could be French? – as it stands for French Connection UK Ltd. But do
people, even young kids, see it like that? The BBC objected to me using “fcukitall”
as a pseudonym on their Radio Three message board. But then, some sections
the BBC are still rooted in the nineteenth century – so we should not use
them as a yardstick, culturally or otherwise.